Sample essay

The remainder of this essay writing tutorial is based on a short sample 'divorce
essay' (about 1,000 words).

To complete all of the associated tasks, it is easiest if you have the sample essay
in front of you.

A major change that has occurred in the Western family is an increased incidence in
divorce. Whereas in the past, divorce was a relatively rare occurrence, in recent
times it has become quite commonplace. This change is borne out clearly in census
figures. For example thirty years ago in Australia, only one marriage in ten ended
in divorce; nowadays the figure is more than one in three (Australian Bureau of
Statistics, 1996: p.45). A consequence of this change has been a substantial
increase in the number of single parent families and the attendant problems that
this brings (Kilmartin, 1997).

An important issue for sociologists, and indeed for all of society, is why these
changes in marital patterns have occurred. In this essay I will seek to critically
examine a number of sociological explanations for the 'divorce phenomenon' and also
consider the social policy implications that each explanation carries with it. It
will be argued that the best explanations are to be found within a broad socio-
economic framework.

One type of explanation for rising divorce has focused on changes in laws relating
to marriage. For example, Bilton, Bonnett and Jones (1987) argue that increased
rates of divorce do not necessarily indicate that families are now more unstable.
It is possible, they claim, that there has always been a degree of marital
instability. They suggest that changes in the law have been significant, because
they have provided unhappily married couples with 'access to a legal solution to
pre-existent marital problems' (p.301). Bilton et al. therefore believe that
changes in divorce rates can be best explained in terms of changes in the legal
system. The problem with this type of explanation however, is that it does not
consider why these laws have changed in the first place. It could be argued that
reforms to family law, as well as the increased rate of divorce that has
accompanied them, are the product of more fundamental changes in society.

Another type of explanation is one that focuses precisely on these broad societal
changes. For example, Nicky Hart (cited in Haralambos, 1995) argues that increases
in divorce and marital breakdown are the result of economic changes that have
affected the family. One example of these changes is the raised material
aspirations of families, which Hart suggests has put pressure on both spouses to
become wage earners. Women as a result have been forced to become both homemakers
and economic providers. According to Hart, the contradiction of these two roles has
lead to conflict and this is the main cause of marital breakdown. It would appear
that Hart's explanation cannot account for all cases of divorce - for example,
marital breakdown is liable to occur in families where only the husband is working.
Nevertheless, her approach, which is to relate changes in family relations to
broader social forces, would seem to be more probing than one that looks only at
legislative change.

The two explanations described above have very different implications for social
policy, especially in relation to how the problem of increasing marital instability
might be dealt with. Bilton et al. (1995) offer a legal explanation and hence would
see the solutions also being determined in this domain. If rises in divorce are
thought to be the consequence of liberal divorce laws, the obvious way to stem this
rise is to make them less obtainable. This approach, one imagines, would lead to a
reduction in divorce statistics; however, it cannot really be held up as a genuine
solution to the problems of marital stress and breakdown in society. Indeed it
would seem to be a solution directed more at symptoms than addressing fundamental
causes. Furthermore, the experience of social workers, working in the area of
family welfare suggests that restricting a couple's access to divorce would in some
cases serve only to exacerbate existing marital problems (Johnson, 1981). In those
cases where violence is involved, the consequences could be tragic. Apart from all
this, returning to more restrictive divorce laws seems to be a solution little
favoured by Australians. (Harrison, 1990).

Hart (cited in Haralambos, 1995), writing from a Marxist-feminist position, traces

marital conflict to changes in the capitalist economic system and their resultant
effect on the roles of men and women. It is difficult to know however, how such an
analysis might be translated into practical social policies. This is because the
Hart program would appear to require in the first place a radical restructuring of
the economic system. Whilst this may be desirable for some, it is not achievable in
the present political climate. Hart is right however, to suggest that much marital
conflict can be linked in some way to the economic circumstances of families. This
is borne out in many statistical surveys which show consistently that rates of
divorce are higher among socially disadvantaged families (McDonald, 1993). This
situation suggests then that social policies need to be geared to providing support
and security for these types of families. It is little cause for optimism however,
that in recent years governments of all persuasions have shown an increasing
reluctance to fund social welfare programs of this kind.

It is difficult to offer a comprehensive explanation for the growing trend of

marital breakdown; and it is even more difficult to find solutions that might
ameliorate the problems created by it. Clearly though, as I have argued in this
essay, the most useful answers are to be found not within a narrow legal framework,
but within a broader socio-economic one.

Finally, it is worth pointing out that, whilst we may appear to be living in a time
of increased family instability, research suggests that historically, instability
may have been the norm rather than the exception. As Bell and Zajdow (1997) point
out, in the past, single parent and step families were more common than is assumed
- although the disruptive influence then was not divorce, but the premature death
of one or both parents. This situation suggests that in studying the modern family,
one needs to employ a historical perspective, including the possibility of looking
to the past in searching for ways of dealing with problems in the present.

References
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1996). Divorces, Australia. Canberra: Australian
Government Printing Service.

Bell, R. and G. Zajdow (1997) Family and household. In R. Jureidini, S. Kenny and
M. Poole (eds). Sociology: Australian Connections. St Leonards. NSW: Allen and
Unwin

Bilton, T., K. Bonnett and P. Jones (1987). Introductory Sociology, 2nd edition.
London: MacMillan.

Haralambos, M. (1995). Sociology: Themes and Perspectives, 3rd edition. London:

Bell and Hyman.

Harrison, M. (1995). Grounds for divorce. Family Matters. No 42 pp 34-35.

Johnson, V. (1981). The Last Resort: A Women's Refuge. Ringwood: Penguin.

Kilmartin, C. (1997). Children divorce and one-parent families. Family Matters. No.
48. ( Available On-line Opens in a new window)

McDonald, P. (1993). Family Trends and Structure in Australia. Australian Family

Briefings No 3. Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.